I-UxSED 2010 is built upon the tradition of I-USED’08 and ’09
(International Workshop on the Interplay between Usability Evaluation
and Software Development). It, however, targets at a much broader scope
of User Experience (UX) where user's emotions, affects, motivations, and
values are given as much, if not more, attention than ease of use, ease
of learning and basic subjective satisfaction - the three traditional
usability metrics.

We understand the relationship between UX and usability as the latter is
subsumed by the former. Usability evaluation methods (UEMs) and metrics
are relatively more mature. In contrast, UX evaluation methods (UXEMs)
which draw largely on UEMs are still taking shape. It is conceivable
that feeding outcomes of UX evaluation back to the software development
cycle and instigating the required changes can even be more challenging
than doing so for Usability Evaluation (UE). Several challenges are as
follows:
* UX attributes are (much) more fuzzy and malleable, what kinds of
diagnostic information and improvement suggestion can be drawn from
evaluation feedback. How does the evaluation feedback enable
designers/developers to fix this experiential problem (cf. usability
problem) and how can they know that their fix works?
* Emphasis is put on conducting UE in the early phases of a development
lifecycle with the use of low fidelity prototypes. However, is this
principle applicable to UX evaluation? Is it feasible to capture
authentic experiential responses with a low-fidelity prototype? If yes,
how can we draw insights from these responses?
* Irrespective of whether formal or informal evaluation approaches are
applied to usability or UX, it is the persuasiveness of empirical
evidence that is ultimately the test of its worth. Is UX evaluation
feedback less persuasive than usability feedback? If yes, will the
impact of UX evaluation be weaker than UE?
* Software Engineering (SE) community has recognized that usability does
not only affect the design of user interfaces but the software system
development as a whole. Can such recognition and implications be taken
for granted for UX, given that the evaluation methodologies and measures
of UX could be very different (e.g. artistic performance)?
While the gap between HCI and SE with regard to usability has somewhat
been narrowed, thanks to years of endeavour of the researchers in both
communities, it may be widened again due to the emergence of UX.

GOALS

The goal of this Workshop is to bring together researchers and
practitioners from HCI and SE to identify challenges and plausible
resolutions to optimize the impact of UX evaluation feedback on the
development of systems that should eventually be usable, pleasurable and
desirable. With this focus, contributions on the following topics, but
are not limited to, are invited:
* Which artefacts of software development are useful as the basis for UX
evaluation and how do such artefacts influence the selection of UX
evaluation methods?
* What are the forms and characteristics of UX evaluation feedback that
are considered or proved useful and necessary for software development
(including the UI design)?
* How can UX evaluation methods be integrated in emerging techniques and
approaches for software development (including the UI design)?
* How do software designers’/developers’ perceptions of UX evaluation
feedback relate to their redesign strategies and approaches (e.g.
prioritisation)?
* How can the effectiveness of UX evaluation feedback in improving the
software quality be evaluated (i.e. the issue of downstream utility)?

Participants

Participants (max. 20) are accepted on the basis of their submitted
papers. The intended audience is primarily SE and HCI researchers and
practitioners who are working on and have experiences with the theme.

Papers should be submitted in PDF-format to the workshop reviewing
system at (http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=iuxsed2010).
Submissions should preferably describe empirical studies of the
interplay between UX evaluation and software development, but those
addressing theoretical frameworks for this theme are welcome as well.

Two types of submissions are solicited: Full papers with up to 6 pages
describing substantial, completed work, and position papers with 2 pages
describing either results that can be concisely reported or work in
progress. Both types of papers should be formatted according to the
SIGCHI ACM template. All papers will be peer reviewed. The workshop
proceedings will be published on-line in CEUR-WS.org (ISSN 1613-0073)

Activities Planned and Outcomes
The tentative workshop programme is as follows:
* A keynote speech by a recognized researcher in the field
* Presentation of selected papers
* Small thematic group discussion on major issues
* Plenary report and discussion of main issues
* Future work and collaboration

We plan to contact key HCI journals about their willingness to produce a
special issue on the topic of the workshop.